↓ Skip to main content

Random and independent sampling of endogenous tryptic peptides from normal human EDTA plasma by liquid chromatography micro electrospray ionization and tandem mass spectrometry

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Proteomics, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
3 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Random and independent sampling of endogenous tryptic peptides from normal human EDTA plasma by liquid chromatography micro electrospray ionization and tandem mass spectrometry
Published in
Clinical Proteomics, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12014-017-9176-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jaimie Dufresne, Angelique Florentinus-Mefailoski, Juliet Ajambo, Ammara Ferwa, Peter Bowden, John Marshall

Abstract

Normal human EDTA plasma samples were collected on ice, processed ice cold, and stored in a freezer at - 80 °C prior to experiments. Plasma test samples from the - 80 °C freezer were thawed on ice or intentionally warmed to room temperature. Protein content was measured by CBBR binding and the release of alcohol soluble amines by the Cd ninhydrin assay. Plasma peptides released over time were collected over C18 for random and independent sampling by liquid chromatography micro electrospray ionization and tandem mass spectrometry (LC-ESI-MS/MS) and correlated with X!TANDEM. Fully tryptic peptides by X!TANDEM returned a similar set of proteins, but was more computationally efficient, than "no enzyme" correlations. Plasma samples maintained on ice, or ice with a cocktail of protease inhibitors, showed lower background amounts of plasma peptides compared to samples incubated at room temperature. Regression analysis indicated that warming plasma to room temperature, versus ice cold, resulted in a ~ twofold increase in the frequency of peptide identification over hours-days of incubation at room temperature. The type I error rate of the protein identification from the X!TANDEM algorithm combined was estimated to be low compared to a null model of computer generated random MS/MS spectra. The peptides of human plasma were identified and quantified with low error rates by random and independent sampling that revealed 1000s of peptides from hundreds of human plasma proteins from endogenous tryptic peptides.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 1 33%
Other 1 33%
Student > Master 1 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 33%
Psychology 1 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 December 2017.
All research outputs
#7,069,453
of 12,299,992 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Proteomics
#74
of 150 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,353
of 345,614 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Proteomics
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,299,992 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 150 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,614 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them